Most people, meeting a new idea, do not think "is this true or false?" They don't even think "is this good or bad for my team?" They think, actually: "is this the kind of thing my team would support me for believing?"

It's exactly the same with programming, but most programmers lack the capacity to tell.

tpot is under attack by dozens of fake techies lmao wonder how many of them are bots

The ideal way is very likely an amalgam of the two where your modeling tools are fluid enough that they allow you to quickly iterate your model and selectively run parts of the system in test scenarios.

If you need to change for yourself but people you know are still attached to how you used to be - what's the kindest way to deal with that?

Dudes are absolutely floundering at their sigma male grind and everyone sees it but themselves

Finally The worst AI take

A radical idea: the systematic eradication of people who lie for clout or money

Bros I think the DM bots might be onto me

I've already been seeing some people I consider friends have their agency and sense of reality taken away by AI-centric cults. Focusing too much on AI doom as about bioengineering and similar advanced tech makes us close our eyes to the effects AI can have on people who are

This is often an issue with how we manage dependencies. Bitrot is often downstream of link rot.

People might rail on GCs a lot, but garbage collection is non-ironically one of the biggest success stories of more "academic" computer science research entering day-to-day software engineering practice and we're all better off for it.

I think we are all (correctly) fed up with overregulation and a general excess of "safety discourse" in society, but we must be careful not to go too far the other way. This should be about opening ourselves up to make *better* mistakes instead of just allowing ourselves to